Hogeboom v. Genet
6 Johns. 325
Opinion
An interlocutory, or final judgment, cannot be entered in vacation, unless on a cognovit actionem.
Kent, Ch. J. said he had always supposed, that an . interlocutory judgment might be entered at any time, after four days in term had intervened, either in vacation or term time. But since it seemed to be the general opinion, that the practice was different, he acquiesced in granting the motion.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hogeboom v. Genet, 6 Johns. 325 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1810).
6 Johns. 325 (Hogeboom v. Genet) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Schnepel v. Mellen
3 Mont. 118 (Montana Supreme Court, 1878)
Stewart v. Walters
38 N.J.L. 274 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1876)
Bonnell v. Weaver
3 F. Cas. 851 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Wisconsin, 1856)
Brownfield v. Commonwealth ex rel. Manro
13 Serg. & Rawle 265 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1825)